Archives

(Natural News) Two recent events have forced a glaring spotlight on the $30 billion a year vaccine industry: First, President Donald Trump announced a plan to establish a commission chaired by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. (RFK) to investigate vaccine safety and scientific integrity. The second, again featuring RFK, is when he and actor Robert De Niro announced a $100,000 reward to any scientist (or anyone else) who could conclusively prove the safety of mercury (in the form thimerosal) in vaccines.

Both events have unleashed a veritable storm of fury from the mainstream media, many of whom label both De Niro and RFK “vaccine skeptics” or “anti-vaccine,” despite the men’s repeated objections and insistence that they are pro-vaccine and dutifully had all their children vaccinated. Their very specific concern is the volume of vaccines being added to the CDC’s childhood immunization schedule, and the presence of mercury in many of those vaccines. (RELATED: Keep up with the latest in the debate on mercury in vaccines at Thimerosal.news)

The CDC determines the immunization schedule, and failure to comply with it means children can be refused admittance to public schools. And that schedule certainly merits closer scrutiny. The agency has doubled the number of required vaccines since the mid-1980s, with nearly 40 doses now required before the age of two years. Coincidentally – or so the CDC would have you believe – autism numbers have increased 10-fold since the 1980s, and asthma has more than doubled in the same period.

Beijing to Judge Every Resident Based on Behavior by End of 2020

China’s plan to judge each of its 1.3 billion people based on their social behavior is moving a step closer to reality, with Beijing set to adopt a lifelong points program by 2021 that assigns personalized ratings for each resident.

The capital city will pool data from several departments to reward and punish some 22 million citizens based on their actions and reputations by the end of 2020, according to a plan posted on the Beijing municipal government’s website on Monday. Those with better so-called social credit will get “green channel” benefits while those who violate laws will find life more difficult.

The Beijing project will improve blacklist systems so that those deemed untrustworthy will be “unable to move even a single step,” according to the government’s plan. Xinhua reported on the proposal Tuesday, while the report posted on the municipal government’s website is dated July 18.

China has long experimented with systems that grade its citizens, rewarding good behavior with streamlined services while punishing bad actions with restrictions and penalties. Critics say such moves are fraught with risks and could lead to systems that reduce humans to little more than a report card.

All humans are descended from just TWO people and a catastrophic event almost wiped out ALL species 100,000 years ago, scientists claim

Genetic ‘bar codes’ of five million animals from different species were surveyed

The research deduced that humans and animals sprang from single pair

This happened after a catastrophic event a long time after the last ice age

===

All modern humans descended from a solitary pair who lived 100,000 to 200,000 years ago, scientists say.

Scientists surveyed the genetic ‘bar codes’ of five million animals – including humans – from 100,000 different species and deduced that we sprang from a single pair of adults after a catastrophic event almost wiped out the human race.

These bar codes, or snippets of DNA that reside outside the nuclei of living cells, suggest that it’s not just people who came from a single pair of beings, but nine out of every 10 animal species, too

Stoeckle and Thaler, the scientists who headed the study, concluded that ninety percent of all animal species alive today come from parents that all began giving birth at roughly the same time, less than 250 thousand years ago – throwing into doubt the patterns of human evolution.

Theodor Herzl is generally considered the founder of the Modern Zionist movement, though it may come as a surprise to learn that the movement actually has decidedly Christian roots…. First the idea of “Christian Zionism” goes back at least to the theological reflections and teaching of John Nelson Darby (1800–1882) who advocated “dispensational” theology which affirmed that the state of Israel would one day be revived and the Jewish people would be gathered to their ancient homeland. Later, Darby influenced a number of other Christian thinkers, including the Reverend William Hechler (1845-1931) who took up the political cause of Zionism years before Theodor Herzl began his work in this area, and who foresaw the return of Jewish people to their homeland as a biblical imperative. (Of course this was taught by Yeshua himself in the Gospel of Matthew (24-25) where the perpetuity of the Jewish people was assumed and their presence established at the time of the parousia, or the “second coming” of the Messiah.) “Hechler took part in the early Zionist Congresses – and even received special words of gratitude from Herzl for his work. Herzl noted that Hechler and his biblical inspiration had a great impact on his efforts, giving him a sense that he was a modern-day Moses leading his people back to the Promised Land” (Dr. Jürgen Bühler, “Christian Zionism”). The story of the close partnership between Herzl and Hechler is told in the book “The Prince and the Prophet,” by Claude Duvernoy.

Reverend William Hechler

By:

Dr. Jürgen Bühler

As Theodor Herzl’s close partner in the early Zionist movement, his activism helped lay the groundwork for establishing a Jewish state in their historic homeland.

He used his connections with European royalty to help Herzl secure meetings with key world leaders. Few people were as passionate and intense in working for Zionism and the Jewish people. Yet even fewer people know his name.

We are speaking of the Reverend William Hechler, a devout Christian who befriended Herzl and became the “foreign minister” of the Zionist movement.

Eighty-five years after his death – the date of which will be remembered this coming January – Hechler is not commemorated across the country that he helped to found. No street bears his name, no structure, no institution. One of the key leaders of the early Zionist movement, and one of the fathers of Christian Zionism, the man that serves as an inspiration for the International Christian Embassy Jerusalem, is almost forgotten. Now is the time for the State of Israel to recognize its debt to this man who worked so hard for its establishment.

William Hechler was not the first Christian who recognized the religious importance of the Jewish return to their homeland, but he was the first to work actively alongside the newly-formed Zionist movement. Born in 1845 to a devout Anglican family, Hechler took up the cause of Zionism years before Herzl began his activity. As an Evangelical Christian, Hechler saw the return of Jews to their homeland as a biblical imperative.

Faithful to this commandment, he was looking for Jewish leaders who would get behind the return to Zion. When he read Herzl’s booklet on “The Jewish State,” Hechler went immediately and knocked on his door to meet this visionary and encourage him to pursue his dream.

In those days, Hechler served as chaplain of the British Embassy in Vienna, and he used his connections with the German royal family to open doors for Herzl across Europe. It started with a meeting with Frederick I, Grand Duke of Baden, to lay out his plan for Jewish resettlement in Eretz Israel. Hechler also accompanied Herzl on a journey to Palestine, and helped him meet the German Kaiser, Wilhelm II. Hechler also served as a special envoy on behalf of the British prime minister in connection with Herzl’s efforts.

Hechler took part in the early Zionist Congresses – and even received special words of gratitude from Herzl for his work. Herzl noted that Hechler and his biblical inspiration had a great impact on his efforts, giving him a sense that he was a modern-day Moses leading his people back to the Promised Land.

Hechler remained an ardent Zionist after Herzl’s passing, and was in contact with Jewish and Christian leaders until his death. In the years before World War II, he called for Jews to leave Europe and warned of impending catastrophe. Unfortunately, no one heard him. The story of the close partnership between Herzl and Hechler is told in the book “The Prince and the Prophet,” by Claude Duvernoy.

The legacy left by Hechler has not disappeared. Zionist Christian organizations, led by the ICEJ as well as millions of Christians around the world, continue to walk in the path of William Hechler, a great friend of the Jewish people.

Adjuvants found in vaccines have led to an increase of autoimmune disease

(Natural News) Despite Big Pharma’s attempts at slandering science that sheds light on the toxic reality of vaccine ingredients and their potential to cause harm, scientists around the world have continued to study vaccine adjuvants and their relationship to autoimmune disease. Immunologists from Israel have recently confirmed what past research has long suggested: Vaccine-induced disease is an increasingly common, yet unrecognized, phenomenon — and vaccine adjuvants like aluminum are indeed a threat to human health. In spite of these risks, the vaccine industry and their puppets are doing everything to promote their “safe and effective” vaccine propaganda.

Back in 2011, leading immunologist Yehuda Shoenfeld established the idea of Autoimmune Syndrome Induced by Adjuvants, or “ASIA” for short. A recently published review of current research has confirmed Shoenfeld’s initial hypothesis, and the team of Israeli scientists have pinpointed a key suspect in the onset of vaccine-induced illness: Aluminum.

“Vaccines and autoimmunity are linked fields,” the reviewers state of their data. Autoimmunity caused by vaccines, they say, can be severe, and even fatal.

Current research and case studies were reviewed by the team. The ASIA model ultimately explains that adverse vaccine reactions have been occurring since the practice began — and that the adjuvants used to stoke the immune system into action are a major vector for disease. Indeed, in some individuals, adjuvants can set off a wave of immune system reactions that culminates in the onset of any number of autoimmune diseases.

The team points to aluminum as one of the biggest threats found in inoculations.

“Aluminum compounds persist for up to 8-11 years post vaccination in the human body,” the scientists write.

“This fact, combined with repeated exposure may account for a hyper activation of the immune system and subsequent chronic inflammation,” the team adds.

Aluminum is toxic

Overall, the researchers identified three risks associated with aluminum. As CMSRI reports:

The paper identifies three documented risks associated with the most common vaccine adjuvant, the metal aluminum: 1) it persists in the body for years; 2) it can “trigger pathological immune responses” and 3) it can “pass through the [blood brain barrier] BBB into the [central nervous system] CNS where it can trigger immune-inflammatory processes, resulting in brain inflammation and long-term neural dysfunction.”

The immunologists add that in experimental models, vaccines have been shown to encourage the production of “autoantibodies,” which are immune cells that target the body’s own cells, rather than pathogens or other invaders. The scientists explain that the presence of autoantibodies can precede the onset of full-blown autoimmune disease by several years.

The population of self-identified witches has risen dramatically in the United States in recent decades, as interest in astrology and witchcraft practices have become increasingly mainstreamed.

While data is sparse, Quartz noted, the practice of witchcraft has grown significantly in recent decades; those who identify as witches has risen concurrently with the rise of the “witch aesthetic.”

“While the U.S. government doesn’t regularly collect detailed religious data, because of concerns that it may violate the separation of church and state, several organizations have tried to fill the data gap,” Quartz reported.

“From 1990 to 2008, Trinity College in Connecticut ran three large, detailed religion surveys. Those have shown that Wicca grew tremendously over this period. From an estimated 8,000 Wiccans in 1990, they found there were about 340,000 practitioners in 2008. They also estimated there were around 340,000 Pagans in 2008.”

Pew Research Center studied the issue in 2014, discovering that 0.4 percent of Americans, approximately 1 to 1.5 million people, identify as Wicca or Pagan, meaning their communities continue to experience significant growth.

The rapid rise is not a surprise to some given philosophical and spiritual trends in culture.

“It makes sense that witchcraft and the occult would rise as society becomes increasingly postmodern. The rejection of Christianity has left a void that people, as inherently spiritual beings, will seek to fill,” said author Julie Roys, formerly of Moody Radio, in comments emailed to The Christian Post Tuesday.

“Plus, Wicca has effectively repackaged witchcraft for millennial consumption. No longer is witchcraft and paganism satanic and demonic,” she said, “it’s a ‘pre-Christian tradition’ that promotes ‘free thought’ and ‘understanding of earth and nature.'”

Yet such repackaging is deceptive, Roys added, “but one that a generation with little or no biblical understanding is prone to accept.”

“It’s tragic, and a reminder of how badly we need spiritual revival in this country, and also that ‘our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the powers of this dark world,'” she said, referencing Ephesians 6, which explains spiritual warfare.

Similarly, radio host and author Carmen LaBerge noted on Twitter that the figures are striking in that witches outnumber certain Christian denominations.

“As mainline Protestantism continues its devolution, the U.S. witch population is rising astronomically. There may now be more Americans who identify as practicing witches, 1.5 mil, than there are members of mainline Presbyterianism (PCUSA) 1.4 mil,” she said Tuesday.

Vaccines are truly one of modern medicine’s biggest farces. The flu vaccine is one of the best examples of this. After all, if the vaccine really worked the way it was supposed to, why would you need to be vaccinated every year? Well, as Mike Adams reports in a Natural News article, the CDC says, “Vaccines wear off.”

Doesn’t that just inspire such confidence? The CDC also tells people that they need to be re-vaccinated each and every year of their lives against the flu because there are so many different strains. Yet, in 2011, people who played along and got their flu shots received the same exact vaccine that was given out in 2010. So, if these vaccines are “so effective,” why did anyone need to be vaccinated again in 2011?

If vaccines work effectively, that would inherently mean that the human recipient now has developed their own antibodies which will protect them against the disease they were vaccinated against. Antibodies last most of your life; that’s why you only got the chicken pox vaccine one time as a child, and not every year. So, what is really going on here with vaccines? Do they work, or don’t they?

As Mike Adams writes:

“They don’t really produce the same quality and strength of antibodies that your own body would produce from a natural infection and recovery.”

The truth is that vaccines are likely to wear off and leave you with zero protection against the disease you were vaccinated against. The industry wants you to need yearly jabs – how else would they make so much money? They need return customers, and what better way to produce them than with vaccines that only work temporarily?

What is worst of all is that the CDC openly admits this fact, and still somehow manages to convince people they need a yearly flu vaccine! As The Associated Press reported, the CDC has said, “Government health officials are urging nearly everyone to get this fall’s flu shot. They say a vaccine’s protection can fade significantly after several months.”

The CDC also reports on their own website that the flu vaccine needs to be repeated yearly “for the best protection,” because the body’s immune response from vaccination will wane over time. So, it’s not that the vaccines don’t work – no, no. It’s your immune system that doesn’t work, according to the CDC’s logic.

A few months of protection, huh? Now that is just obscene. Why are people being pushed to pay for something that doesn’t even work? There is so much evidence that flu vaccines are a scam. Again, the CDC itself admits that you can still get the flu after you’ve gotten your shot.

As usual, the government agency that once functioned to protect the people of its nation has been corrupted by greed. Mike Adams notes that a top vaccine scientist from the CDC, Poul Thorsen, was indicted by a federal grand jury for money laundering and fraud. How likely do you think it is that he’s the only one?

We are witnessing the greatest purge of conservative voices in modern American history. Social media websites are the marketplace of today, and the tech giants have decided that they are going to take control of public conversation by removing any conservative voices that “offend” them. And it turns out that there are vast numbers of prominent conservative voices that are deemed to be deeply “offensive”. We all knew that the technocrats were not going to stop with Alex Jones, but many had hoped that they would at least slow down a little bit. Armies of Internet censors have been hired to weed out “toxic ideas”, and we get more reports of good conservative people being censored with each passing day. For example, earlier today I came across an article about how Facebook had just banned extremely popular “Activist Mommy” Elizabeth Johnston…

Johnston, who has more than 600,000 followers on Facebook, often speaks out on controversial social issues such as homosexuality and pornographic Sex-Ed curricula in public schools…. Facebook told Johnston her post did not “follow the Facebook Community Standards.”

TWITTER SUSPENDS BENGHAZI HERO After Criticism of President Obama!

by Jim HoftSeptember 9, 2018

Barack Obama (aka Barry Sotero) stepped out of shadows on Friday and reminded Americans of many economic, domestic and foreign policy failures. Obama lectured President Trump, accused him of racism, and attempted to take credit for President Trump’s economic miracle. But Barack Obama’s worst lie was his remarks on Benghazi.

Barack Obama: “The politics of division and paranoia has found a home, unfortunately, in the Republican party. … they’ve embraced wild conspiracy theories by those surrounding Benghazi. Or my birth certificate.”

Benghazi hero Kris Paronto responded to the former president.

Kris has not forgotten about the men lost as Obama did nothing.

Benghazi is a conspiracy @BarackObama ?! How bout we do this,let’s put your cowardly ass on the top of a roof with 6 of your buddies&shoot rpg’s&Ak47’s at you while terrorists lob 81mm mortars killing 2 of your buddies all while waiting for US support that you never sent🖕🏼#scum

Apparently Kris ‘Tanto’ Paronto can’t defend against the lies so Twitter promptly put him in a timeout.

After being in the @Twitter penalty box for a few and having to delete the below tweet 😏 for offending the leftist hate group @itmustend_ 😢 for their epic fail of telling Rob O’Neill that BHusseinObama killed UBL and not him I’m back up..sooo Twitter doesn’t censor ehh @jack ? pic.twitter.com/nLSYRcGr9e

Conservative non-profit group PragerU appears to be facing Facebook censorship, as many recent posts from group are suffering from a 99.9999 percent drop in engagement based on Facebook’s own dashboard. The Social Media Masters of the Universe also pulled down two PragerU videos, which it labeled “hate speech.”

Echoing the apparent page limitation of conservative commentating duo Diamond and Silk, the conservative non-profit group PragerU — which produces educational videos on conservative issues — appears to have found its Facebook page’s reach drastically limited. The group’s Facebook page boasts three million followers, but its most recent posts have been seen by almost none of its followers, according to the Facebook dashboard.

PragerU social media influencer Will Witt posted a screenshot of the Facebook page’s dashboard which shows a number of statistics relating to posts from the page, including the reach posts have and how many users have clicked on links in the posts. According to the photos posted by Witt, PragerU’s last nine posts have reached between one and three of their followers. Previous posts have reached between 50,000 and 95,000 of PragerU’s followers.

The UMC of Minnesota has removed the word ‘Father’ from the historic Apostle’s Creed for worship services, sparking outrage from the broader Christian community. The removal is because UMC Minnesota wants to be more tolerant towards transgenderism.

At the annual Minnesota Conference of the United Methodist Church, the historic Apostles’ Creed was edited to remove the word ‘Father,’ to make it more compliant with culture.

The creed goes back to the days of the Early Church and is an affirmation of the Christian Faith. The reading is still widely used in today’s churches and sometimes is used during parts of worship.

At the Minnesota Conference, which was held from May 30–June 1, liturgical folders reportedly included a copy of the creed that removed gender-specific language for God, changing “God the Father Almighty” to “God the Creator Almighty” and “Jesus Christ His Only Son” to “Jesus Christ God’s Only Son.”

Rev. Keith Mcilwain, the pastor at Slippery Rock United Methodist Church in the Western Pennsylvania Conference, obtained a copy of the edited creed from a friend who attended the Annual Conference. Mcilwain posted an image of the edit to social media.

Conservative Speech Be Banned!

by MICHAEL BROWNHeadlines on Drudge Report and Breitbart shouted out the dire news: APPLE REGULATES ‘HATE.’ And, MASTERS OF THE UNIVERSE: FACEBOOK APPLE PURGE INFOWARS FOR ‘HATE SPEECH.’Over on Twitter, Paul Joseph Watson, one of the leading contributors to Infowars, raised his voice in protest and warning: “Facebook has permanently BANNED Infowars. For unspecified ‘hate speech.’ They didn’t even tell us what the offending posts were. This sets a chilling precedent for free speech. To all other conservative news outlets—you are next. The great censorship purge has truly begun.”He added, “Whatever you think of Infowars, they’re coming for you next.”Now, I’ve mentioned before that, by and large, I am not a fan of Infowars (although Watson’s takedowns of the radical left are often bitingly on target). At the same time, I’ve stated that YouTube’s conflict with Infowars (the precursor to the current attack) should concern us all.

But let’s leave Infowars out of the picture for the moment. Let me share with you some recent examples of Facebook and Twitter and YouTube coming against conservative speech. You can draw your own conclusions.

1) Facebook blocks Professor Robert Gagnon. In advance of the controversial Revoice conference, professor Gagnon posted some very valid, fair-minded concerns on his Facebook page.

For those of you who don’t know professor Gagnon, he is a respected academic and is neither a name-caller nor a hate-speaker. His book on homosexuality and the Bible is the most authoritative work of its kind, with endorsements from a wide range of leading scholars.

As a result of his post, which under no balanced evaluation can be considered hateful or discriminatory, he was temporarily blocked by Facebook.

2) Facebook does not allow a Christian family organization to boost two of their posts. The Illinois Family Association (IFA) attempted to pay to boost two of their recent posts. The first asked the question, “Will ‘Progressives’ Affirm Identity of Christ-Followers?”

And the post contained this statement: “In the service of tolerance, comity, and consistency, will ‘progressives,’—including homo-activists, ‘trans’-cultists, and the government—accommodate, affirm and celebrate our identity [as Christians] and protect our right to live in accordance with it?”

After waffling on the issue, Facebook finally informed IFA that they would not be allowed to pay money to advertise this post.

One week later, Facebook informed IFA that they would not be allowed to boost thispost, which asked, “Is ANYONE Affected by ‘Trans’ Deviance?”

The article raised concerns, such as: “Parents are raising babies to have no ‘gender identification.’ They’re concealing their children’s sex—a fundamental and profoundly meaningful anthropological fact—from family, friends and even the toddlers themselves.” Such speech must not be promoted!

So, Facebook will not allow the IFA to advertise their posts, even to like-minded conservatives.

3) Twitter blocks a conservative for mimicking the tweets of an unblocked, radical leftist. As reported on the Right Scoop, “Sarah Jeong has been a pretty buzzworthy topic this week, even making it onto the Sunday morning talk shows, after a bunch of tweets hating white people and cops were uncovered and her new employer, The New York Times, was very not upset by them.

“On Twitter this weekend, Turning Points USA’s Candace Owens tried something. She tweeted the same things that Jeong tweeted, to find out if she would be punished even though Jeong was not.”

So, Sarah Jeong, who is guilty of hate speech, got a free pass from Twitter (and The New York Times) for posting horrific comments about white people. Then, to make a point, Candace Owens, a conservative black woman, took Jeong’s own words but substituted “Jewish people” for “white people.”

And she was totally clear in what she did, adding in the very same tweet: “The above statements are from @nytimes editor @sarahjeong. I simply swapped out the word ‘white’ for ‘Jewish’.”

In response, she was temporarily blocked by Twitter, which, as you know, takes hate speech very seriously. (This is a great place for your own sarcastic reply.)

After an uproar of protest against Twitter, her account was quickly reinstated. (Note that Owens did the same thing in another tweet, substituting “black” for “white.” Point proven.)

It would be difficult to approach this controversial subject with a more loving and gracious tone than we did. But because of an aggressive LGBT campaign against the video, YouTube not only demonetized it (which means that regardless of how many times it is viewed, it cannot generate income). YouTube/Google also informed us that we will not be allowed to advertise it—meaning at our expense to likeminded viewers. “Thou shalt not advertise biblical content that offends!”

(If you haven’t watched the video yet, please do, and give it a thumbs up. This helps combat the LGBT activists who have swarmed the video with hateful comments and with thumbs down responses.)

What, then, should we make of this? What of the fact that radical-leftist, highly-bigoted groups like the SPLC are helping these internet giants make their decisions?

Let me repeat what I said in my earlier article about Infowars: Whether you’re an Infowars fan or you find their work distasteful, their potential removal from YouTube should concern you.

Otherwise, soon enough, we’ll have our own version of Martin Niemöller’s famous poem, which will now sound something like this:

First they came for Infowars, and I did not speak out—because I found them offensive.

Then they came for Geller and Spencer, and I did not speak out­—because I found them obnoxious.

Then they came for Prager U, and I did not speak out—because I found them opinionated.

Then they came for a host of others, and I did not speak out—because I have my own life to live.

August 6th was one of darkest days in the history of the Internet. When I learned that Facebook, YouTube, Apple, Spotify, Pinterest and others had colluded to take down content from Alex Jones all on the same day, I knew exactly what was happening. They timed their attack so that it would hit the press at the beginning of the weekly news cycle on Monday so that their purge would have maximum societal impact. And the fact that there was such overt collusion was obviously meant to send a message. We were supposed to understand that if they can do this to Alex Jones, they can do it to any of us, and so we better shut up and fall in line. I can’t even begin to tell you how sick I feel right now. The big tech giants have made it abundantly clear how they feel about all of us, and there is no future for alternative points of view on any of their platforms.

The current purge of conservative voices has been going on for months, but this is the biggest bombshell by far. The following excerpt from a Los Angeles Times article is a typical example of how the mainstream media covered this story…

Major technology companies including Apple, Facebook and YouTube deleted years of content from conservative conspiracy theorist Alex Jones and his Infowars platforms over allegations of hate speech, a sudden clampdown that is fueling the growing debate over how big technology companies choose to censor.

The move was unusual for its sweep and speed, suggesting a new assertiveness by technology companies that in the past have worked to avoid alienating conservatives, who often assert that left-leaning Silicon Valley is biased against them. The removals appeared to be prompted by more users flagging Infowars content for policy violations.

In addition to the “big three”, Spotify and Pinterest pulled down content from Infowars as well, and there is no way that this could have been done simultaneously unless it was planned well in advance. Lawyers have to be consulted, CEOs have to give their approval, etc. This was a cold-blooded move that was carefully calculated down to the finest details.

First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me. – Martin Niemöller

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

First Amendment: An Overview

The First Amendment of the United States Constitution protects the right to freedom of religion and freedom of expression from government interference. It prohibits any laws that establish a national religion, impede the free exercise of religion, abridge the freedom of speech, infringe upon the freedom of the press, interfere with the right to peaceably assemble, or prohibit citizens from petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances. It was adopted into the Bill of Rights in 1791. The Supreme Court interprets the extent of the protection afforded to these rights. The First Amendment has been interpreted by the Court as applying to the entire federal government even though it is only expressly applicable to Congress. Furthermore, the Court has interpreted the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as protecting the rights in the First Amendment from interference by state governments.

Freedom of Religion

Two clauses in the First Amendment guarantee freedom of religion. The Establishment Clauseprohibits the government from passing legislation to establish an official religion or preferring one religion over another. It enforces the “separation of church and state.” However, some governmental activity related to religion has been declared constitutional by the Supreme Court. For example, providing bus transportation for parochial school students and the enforcement of “blue laws” is not prohibited. The Free Exercise Clause prohibits the government, in most instances, from interfering with a person’s practice of their religion.

Freedom of Speech / Freedom of the Press

The most basic component of freedom of expression is the right of freedom of speech. The right to freedom of speech allows individuals to express themselves without government interference or regulation. The Supreme Court requires the government to provide substantial justification for the interference with the right of free speech where it attempts to regulate the content of the speech. Generally, a person cannot be held liable, either criminally or civilly for anything written or spoken about a person or topic, so long as it is truthful or based on an honest opinion, and such statements.

A less stringent test is applied for content-neutral legislation. The Supreme Court has also recognized that the government may prohibit some speech that may cause a breach of the peace or cause violence. For more on unprotected and less protected categories of speech see advocacy of illegal action, fighting words, commercial speech and obscenity. The right to free speech includes other mediums of expression that communicate a message. The level of protection speech receives also depends on the forum in which it takes place.

Despite popular misunderstanding the right to freedom of the press guaranteed by the First Amendment is not very different from the right to freedom of speech. It allows an individual to express themselves through publication and dissemination. It is part of the constitutional protection of freedom of expression. It does not afford members of the media any special rights or privileges not afforded to citizens in general.

Right to Assemble / Right to Petition

The right to assemble allows people to gather for peaceful and lawful purposes. Implicit within this right is the right to association and belief. The Supreme Court has expressly recognized that a right to freedom of association and belief is implicit in the First, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments. This implicit right is limited to the right to associate for First Amendment purposes. It does not include a right of social association. The government may prohibit people from knowingly associating in groups that engage and promote illegal activities. The right to associate also prohibits the government from requiring a group to register or disclose its members or from denying government benefits on the basis of an individual’s current or past membership in a particular group. There are exceptions to this rule where the Court finds that governmental interests in disclosure/registration outweigh interference with First Amendment rights. The government may also, generally, not compel individuals to express themselves, hold certain beliefs, or belong to particular associations or groups.

The right to petition the government for a redress of grievances guarantees people the right to ask the government to provide relief for a wrong through the courts (litigation) or other governmental action. It works with the right of assembly by allowing people to join together and seek change from the government.

One day after what appeared to be a coordinated attack by media giants Facebook, Apple, Spotify and Google on Alex Jones, whose various social media accounts were banned or suspended in a matter of hours, the crackdown against alternative media figures continued as several Libertarian figures, including the Ron Paul Institute director, found their Twitter accounts suspended.

… The real interference in “US democracy” comes not from Russia, but from some of its most powerful corporations which now yield more power in some cases than the government itself: “This isn’t “liberal democracy” as they keep pretending. It’s autocracy.”

“…for those that don’t take issue with the latest censorship of right-wingers by big social media — unless we take a stand now, who knows where it could end.”

First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me. – Martin Niemöller

Some Americans have been trailed and closely monitored by undercover air marshals as they traveled on U.S. flights, as part of a previously undisclosed Transportation Security Administration program called Quiet Skies. The marshals take notes on the targeted traveler’s behavior, sending detailed reports to the TSA.

The existence of the program was first reported Saturday by the The Boston Globe,citing an internal TSA bulletin from March as well as anonymous sources within the department. The document leaked to the Globe says the program specifically targets travelers who are not on terrorist watch lists and are not under investigation by any agency.

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is defending its use of a previously secret program used to monitor potential security threats at airports and on planes.

Michael Bilello, an assistant administrator of public affairs for TSA, told The Hill that the “Quiet Skies” initiative does not focus on “ordinary Americans,” but instead zeroes in on a small percentage of the traveling population.

“These programs are not designed to observe the average American,” he said. “They’re designed to protect the traveling public, but they’re not targeting the average American.”

Former Director of National Intelligence (DNI) James Clapper admitted in a CNN interview Saturday that former President Obama instigated the ongoing investigations into Donald Trump and those in his orbit.

Speaking with CNN’s Anderson Cooper, Clapper let slip:

If it weren’t for President Obama we might not have done the intelligence community assessment that we did that set up a whole sequence of events which are still unfolding today including Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation. President Obama is responsible for that. It was he who tasked us to do that intelligence community assessment in the first place.

James Clapper admits to Anderson Cooper that Obama set off the sequence of events that led to the Mueller investigation by tasking the intelligence community assessment.

Recall in May, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) fired off a letter to the Department of Justice demanding unredacted versions of text messages between FBI agent Peter Strzok and former bureau attorney Lisa Page, including one exchange which took place after Strzok had returned from London as part of the recently launched “Operation Crossfire Hurricane” referring to the White House “running” an unknown investigation.

Pope Francis has compared Jesus Christ to the leader of an Islamic terrorist death cult and suggested Christian missionaries have a lot in common with members of ISIS, during a wide-ranging and shocking interview in which he also openly promoted socialism and ordered European women to “breed” with Muslim migrants in order to counter “declining birth rates.”

“Today, I don’t think that there is a fear of Islam as such but of ISIS and its war of conquest, which is partly drawn from Islam,” he told French newspaper La Croix. “It is true that the idea of conquest is inherent in the soul of Islam, however, it is also possible to interpret the objective in Matthew’s Gospel, where Jesus sends his disciples to all nations, in terms of the same idea of conquest.”

The Pope also admitted he does not enjoy learning about European history and he “dreads” hearing about the “Christian roots of Europe” because, in his opinion, the history of Europe has “colonialist overtones.“

It was at this point in the interview that Pope Francis called on European women to “integrate” Muslim migrants into their populations by breeding with them and countering the “declining birth rate” that he blames on the selfishness of white people.

“This integration is all the more necessary today since, as a result of a selfish search for well-being, Europe is experiencing the grave problem of a declining birth rate,” he stated. “A demographic emptiness is developing.”

Pope Francis’ opinions are disturbingly similar to those of top Iman Sheikh Muhammad Ayed, who says Muslims should exploit the migrant crisis to breed with Europeans and “conquer their countries.”

“Europe has become old and decrepit and needs human reinforcement… they are not motivated by compassion for the Levant, its people and its refugees… soon, we will trample them underfoot, Allah willing,” he stated. “Throughout Europe, all the hearts are enthused with hatred toward Muslims. They wish that we were dead, but they have lost their fertility, so they look for fertility in our midst.”

“We will give them fertility! We will breed children with them, because we shall conquer their countries!”

Beware those scientific studies — most are wrong, researcher warns

Washington (AFP) – A few years ago, two researchers took the 50 most-used ingredients in a cook book and studied how many had been linked with a cancer risk or benefit, based on a variety of studies published in scientific journals.

The result? Forty out of 50, including salt, flour, parsley and sugar. “Is everything we eat associated with cancer?” the researchers wondered in a 2013 article based on their findings.

Their investigation touched on a known but persistent problem in the research world: too few studies have large enough samples to support generalized conclusions.

But pressure on researchers, competition between journals and the media’s insatiable appetite for new studies announcing revolutionary breakthroughs has meant such articles continue to be published.

“The majority of papers that get published, even in serious journals, are pretty sloppy,” said John Ioannidis, professor of medicine at Stanford University, who specializes in the study of scientific studies.

This sworn enemy of bad research published a widely cited article in 2005 entitled: “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False.”

Since then, he says, only limited progress has been made.

Some journals now insist that authors pre-register their research protocol and supply their raw data, which makes it harder for researchers to manipulate findings in order to reach a certain conclusion. It also allows other to verify or replicate their studies.

Because when studies are replicated, they rarely come up with the same results. Only a third of the 100 studies published in three top psychology journals could be successfully replicated in a large 2015 test.

Medicine, epidemiology, population science and nutritional studies fare no better, Ioannidis said, when attempts are made to replicate them.

“Across biomedical science and beyond, scientists do not get trained sufficiently on statistics and on methodology,” Ioannidis said.

Too many studies are based solely on a few individuals, making it difficult to draw wider conclusions because the samplings have so little hope of being representative.

– Coffee and Red Wine –

“Diet is one of the most horrible areas of biomedical investigation,” professor Ioannidis added — and not just due to conflicts of interest with various food industries.

“Measuring diet is extremely difficult,” he stressed. How can we precisely quantify what people eat?

In this field, researchers often go in wild search of correlations within huge databases, without so much as a starting hypothesis.

Even when the methodology is good, with the gold standard being a study where participants are chosen at random, the execution can fall short.

A famous 2013 study on the benefits of the Mediterranean diet against heart disease had to be retracted in June by the most prestigious of medical journals, the New England Journal of Medicine, because not all participants were randomly recruited; the results have been revised downwards.

So what should we take away from the flood of studies published every day?

Ioannidis recommends asking the following questions: is this something that has been seen just once, or in multiple studies? Is it a small or a large study? Is this a randomized experiment? Who funded it? Are the researchers transparent?

These precautions are fundamental in medicine, where bad studies have contributed to the adoption of treatments that are at best ineffective, and at worst harmful.

In their book “Ending Medical Reversal,” Vinayak Prasad and Adam Cifu offer terrifying examples of practices adopted on the basis of studies that went on to be invalidated, such as opening a brain artery with stents to reduce the risk of a new stroke.

It was only after 10 years that a robust, randomized study showed that the practice actually increased the risk of stroke.

The solution lies in the collective tightening of standards by all players in the research world, not just journals but also universities, public funding agencies. But these institutions all operate in competitive environments.

“The incentives for everyone in the system are pointed in the wrong direction,” Ivan Oransky, co-founder of Retraction Watch, which covers the withdrawal of scientific articles, tells AFP. “We try to encourage a culture, an atmosphere where you are rewarded for being transparent.”

The problem also comes from the media, which according to Oransky needs to better explain the uncertainties inherent in scientific research, and resist sensationalism.

“We’re talking mostly about the endless terrible studies on coffee, chocolate and red wine,” he said.

Vaccination Alters Genes – Report

Vaccination genetic roulette with a loaded gun

The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) has launched efforts to create a vaccine that would protect people from most flu strains, all at once, with a single shot.

Over the years, I’ve written many articles refuting claims that vaccines are safe and effective, but we’ll put all that aside for the moment and follow the bouncing ball.

Massachusetts Senator and big spender, Ed Markey, has introduced a bill that would shovel no less than a billion dollars toward the universal flu-vaccine project.

Here is a sentence from an NIAID press release that mentions one of several research approaches:

“NIAID Vaccine Research Center scientists have initiated Phase 1/2 studies of a universal flu vaccine strategy that includes an investigational DNA-based vaccine (called a DNA ‘prime’)…”

This is quite troubling, if you know what the phrase “DNA vaccine” means. It refers to what the experts are touting as the next generation of immunizations.

Instead of injecting a piece of a virus into a person, in order to stimulate the immune system, synthesized genes would be shot into the body. This isn’t traditional vaccination anymore. It’s gene therapy.

In any such method, where genes are edited, deleted, added, no matter what the pros say, there are always “unintended consequences,” to use their polite phrase. The ripple effects scramble the genetic structure in numerous unknown ways.

Here is the inconvenient truth about DNA vaccines—

They will permanently alter your DNA.

The reference is the New York Times, 3/15/15, “Protection Without a Vaccine.” It describes the frontier of research—the use of synthetic genes to “protect against disease,” while changing the genetic makeup of humans. This is not science fiction:

“By delivering synthetic genes into the muscles of the [experimental] monkeys, the scientists are essentially re-engineering the animals to resist disease.”

“’The sky’s the limit,’ said Michael Farzan, an immunologist at Scripps and lead author of the new study.”

“The first human trial based on this strategy — called immunoprophylaxis by gene transfer, or I.G.T. — is underway, and several new ones are planned.” [That was three years ago.]

“I.G.T. is altogether different from traditional vaccination. It is instead a form of gene therapy. Scientists isolate the genes that produce powerful antibodies against certain diseases and then synthesize artificial versions. The genes are placed into viruses and injected into human tissue, usually muscle.”

Here is the punchline:

“The viruses invade human cells with their DNA payloads, and the synthetic gene is incorporated into the recipient’s own DNA. If all goes well, the new genes instruct the cells to begin manufacturing powerful antibodies.”

Read that again: “the synthetic gene is incorporated into the recipient’s own DNA.”

Alteration of the human genetic makeup.

Not just a “visit.” Permanent residence. And once a person’s DNA is changed, he will live with that change—and all the ripple effects in his genetic makeup—for the rest of his life.

The Times article taps Dr. David Baltimore for an opinion:

“Still, Dr. Baltimore says that he envisions that some people might be leery of a vaccination strategy that means altering their own DNA, even if it prevents a potentially fatal disease.”

Yes, some people might be leery. If they have two or three working brain cells.

This is genetic roulette with a loaded gun. Anyone and everyone on Earth injected with a DNA vaccine will undergo permanent and unknown genetic changes…

And the further implications are clear. Vaccines can be used as a cover for the injections of any and all genes, whose actual purpose is re-engineering humans in far-reaching ways.

The emergence of this Frankenstein technology is paralleled by a shrill push to mandate vaccines, across the board, for both children and adults. The pressure and propaganda are planet-wide.

The freedom and the right to refuse vaccines has always been vital. It is more vital than ever now.

“No vaccine manufacturer shall be liable…for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death.” – President Ronald Wilson Reagan, as he signed The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) of 1986, absolving drug companies from all medico-legal liability when children die, become chronically ill with vaccine-induced autoimmune disorders or are otherwise disabled from vaccine injuries. That law has led directly to an expected reckless, liability-free development of scores of new, over-priced, potential block-buster vaccines, now numbering over 250. The question that must be asked of Big Medicine’s practitioners: How will the CDC, the AMA, the AAFP and the American Academy of Pediatrics fit any more potentially neurotoxic vaccines into the current well-baby over-vaccination schedule?

PhRMA (the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America), the pharmaceutical industry’s trade association and powerful lobbying group, says that:

today, more than 7,000 medicines are in development globally, all of which have the potential to help patients in the United States and around the world. According to another data source, there are 3,400 medicines in development today just in the United States, an increase of 40 percent since 2005. (Source.)

PhRMA also says that today:

the 271 vaccines in development span a wide array of diseases, and employ exciting new scientific strategies and technologies. These potential vaccines – all in human clinical trials or under review by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) – include 137 for infectious diseases, 99 for cancer, 15 for allergies and 10 for neurological disorders. (Source.)

Whenever the FDA signals that it is ready to grant marketing approval for a new vaccine or drug, the first step for the pharmaceutical company’s marketing department is to promote an “educational” advertising campaign designed to instill fear in parents (and their pediatricians) about the horrible illnesses (albeit previously unknown, benign or rare) that even us doctors hadn’t yet recognized as being significant up until recently. Most of us physicians have gone along with the fear-mongering that makes our practices busier while it also makes billions of dollars in profits for some unworthy CEO or Wall Street investment banker, hedge fund manager or mutual fund investor – all at the expense of America’s precious and vulnerable children who are at high risk of being sickened along the way.

The TV commercials, medical journal articles and drug representatives will be trying to educate us about a new, unaffordable vaccine that will somehow be squeezed into an already crowded and potentially deadly group of shots that America’s already at-risk-of-vaccine-injuries infants will now be receiving at their next well-child (perhaps soon to become chronically ill) check-up.

New Laws Being Passed to Mandate ALL Vaccines, Including Future Vaccines

Recognizing this, and so as not to overload the already over-loaded well-child inoculation schedule, perhaps he CDC (the Big Pharma-subsidized and vaccine cheerleader Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) will be adding shots to the in-hospital and irrational Hepatitis B shot that it recommends be given on day one – when vulnerable mothers are too exhausted and emotionally confused to give truly informed consent.

Many state legislatures are, as we speak, considering (or have already passed laws) criminalizing the previously legal parental right of refusing vaccinations on the basis of religious or philosophical beliefs. That is happening right now in Wisconsin’s Republican-dominated legislature, Minnesota’s split GOP/DFL legislature, and California’s Democratic Party-dominated legislature – where it is already signed into law by Democrat Jerry Brown.

These poorly informed – and heavily bribed politicians – don’t realize that their legislative efforts will be blindly forcing unsuspecting patients to submit to every new blockbuster vaccine that successfully emerges from the pipeline. Talk about making decisions on the basis of partial information or propaganda from sociopathic corporate entities! Attention, Senators Al Franken, Amy Klobuchar and other assorted legislators. Are you listening to the real science or to the corrupted, pseudoscience of Big Pharma?

For parents whose infants’ brains and bodies are immunologically and developmentally immature, be aware that your children may be forced to suffer untested-for and therefore unacknowledged long term neurological, autoimmune and chronic illness adverse effects. Parents need to be aware that if their infant dies, is sickened or is made chronically ill by vaccine ingredients, they, as protective parents, will be forbidden to sue the guilty drug company (or the doctor that administered them) for appropriate damages.

Parents and grandparents of children need to be aware of the fact that many of these new vaccines will be containing contaminants (such as unfilterable viral particles, bacterial particles, monkey kidney cell fragments, human fetal cells, squalene (in anthrax and some experimental swine flu vaccines), peanut oil (a likely cause of the epidemic of peanut allergies), formaldehyde (and even foreign DNA fragments) as well as known neurotoxic additives such as formaldehyde and aluminum (and perhaps even mercury), all of which are known genetic toxins and known causes of (sometimes subtle and sometimes not-so-subtle – but always preventable) brain damage, vaccine-induced epilepsy, autoimmune disorders, the so-called, but erroneously labeled “shaken baby syndrome” (now increasingly understood to represent a vaccine-induced encephalitis), SIDS (sudden infant death syndrome), dementia, autism spectrum disorders, mitochondrial toxicity, damage to the brain’s microglial and astroglial cells (the brain’s immune system), etc.

The Medical Board of California this week ordered that Dr. Bob Sears, an Orange County pediatrician and leading vaccine skeptic, be put on probation for 35 months.

The medical board had accused Sears of gross negligence for writing a doctor’s note for a 2-year-old boy exempting him from all childhood vaccinations. Sears agreed to settle the case.

Under the decision, Sears can keep practicing medicine but will be required to take 40 hours of medical education courses a year, as well as an ethics class, and also be monitored by a fellow doctor. He also must notify all hospital and medical facilities where he practices of the order.

In a Facebook post Friday, Sears denied any wrongdoing.

“Isn’t it my job to listen to my patients and believe what a parent says happened to her baby? Isn’t that what all doctors do with their patients?” Sears wrote. “After all, I don’t want a child to receive a medical treatment that could cause more harm. I am going to first do no harm, every time.”

Sears also said that the medical board has four more cases lined up against him.

“It seems there is an attempt to keep me on probation for the rest of my medical career,” Sears wrote.

Both public health advocates and vaccine skeptics had been closely watching the allegations against Sears, who was seen as a test case for how California will enforce a strict new vaccination law.

“It struck me as possibly the best decision that was going to come down,” said Dr. Jay Gordon, a Santa Monica pediatrician who supports Sears and opposes the stricter vaccine laws in California. “He has a different point of view on vaccine scheduling than is usual, but I think he acted in very, very good faith.”

Sears faced punishments ranging from a public reprimand to a permanent revocation of his license. In the last fiscal year, the medical board, which licenses 137,967 doctors in California, took away 10 licenses because of gross negligence, while putting 85 doctors on probation.

In its accusation against Sears filed in 2016, the medical board said Sears didn’t obtain basic medical information, such as vaccines the 2-year-old boy had received and any reactions to them, before recommending that the child not have any more vaccinations. He took the boy’s mother at her word when she said her son lost urinary function and went limp in response to previous immunizations, according to the filing.

Catherine Martin, of the pro-vaccine advocacy group California Immunization Coalition, said she thought the decision was fair, given that Sears had no prior infractions. She said she expected it would make other doctors think twice about writing exemptions without verifying medical records.

“I hope it gives them pause and helps them understand that this is not acceptable,” Martin said. “I think it’s a sign that the medical board takes these infractions seriously.”

Vaccine exemptions have become a central part of the immunization debate in California in recent years.

(Natural News) The adverse event-deniers who insist that vaccines are 100 percent safe and never cause any problems in children clearly missed a little-known 1991 study published by the United States Government. This paper reveals a clear link between the popular Tdap vaccine for tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis (whooping cough), and microcephaly, a neurological birth defect that in recent years authorities have been erroneously blaming on the Zika virus.

The National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) offered up clear evidence at the time showing that the combination jab can cause not only brain damage in young children, but also heart problems, meningitis, and epilepsy. Epidemiological evidence from human case studies showed that within weeks or even days of getting the Tdap shot, children developed infantile spasms and other common symptoms of microcephaly directly related to the vaccine.

Click here to read the overview of the book entitled, “Adverse Effects of Pertussis and Rubella Vaccines,” concerning the section subtitled, “Evidence Concerning Pertussis Vaccines and Central Nervous System Disorders, Including Infantile Spasms, Hypsarrhythmia, Aseptic Meningitis, and Encephalopathy.”

The government is obsessed with your face. Do not be flattered. This is more of a creepy stalker fixation.

From the federal Department of Homeland Security down to local police departments, governmental use of biometric facial recognition software has gained a startling amount of traction in recent years. And these agencies are getting help from big business, to boot.

For example, DHS is reportedly developing a massive new biometric and biographic database with extensive data on citizens and foreigners alike. The Homeland Advanced Recognition Technology (HART) database will reportedly include at least seven biometric identifiers, including face and voice data, tattoos, DNA, scars, and other “physical descriptors” on as many as 500 million people. The agency has been remarkably hush-hush on how HART will be utilized — but the possibilities are frightening.

DHS expects to launch the new database next fiscal year, according to internal documents. By the following year, they anticipate having iris and facial matching capabilities, and by fiscal year 2021, the database is expected to be functioning in its full capacity. This massive and intrusive initiative will grant a whole host of federal, state, and local agencies access to intimate details about hundreds of millions of Americans and foreigners.

Here’s how the government casts that:

“When HART is fully operational, it will offer a broader range of services to federal government agencies, state and local law enforcement, the intelligence community, and international partners,” a DHS spokesman said in a press release. “HART will provide DHS with a flexible, scalable, and more efficient biometric system that supports core DHS missions and operations for the future.”

In other words, DHS will know everything from what you look like to your birthday to any government ID numbers you may have. And, in a clear erosion of due process and privacy expectations, they’ll be empowered to share this data with local and state police.

While HART will be the most expansive biometric database to date, DHS isn’t the first federal entity to take an interest in using facial identification. As of 2015, the FBI’s Next Generation Identification (NGI) database held records on nearly one-third of the American population, including 52 million mugshots. Half of the states in the country are either actively using NGI or have expressed interest in using it, according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

The fetishizing of facial recognition as a must-have for law enforcement doesn’t stop at the federal level. Last month, Amazon announced it is selling its facial recognition software, known as Rekognition, to local police departments all over the country. This would allow law enforcement to cross reference surveillance camera footage from a crime scene with Amazon’s collection of “tens of millions” of faces.

This all amounts to a gross violation of Americans’ privacy and civil liberties — and in no small part because these technologies are not only abusively obtrusive, but often wrong. Indeed, the data on the efficiency of facial recognition is shaky at best. Researchers at MIT have found that these devices and software are essentially useless when it comes to recognizing the face of a person of color. There’s a 12 percent chance the device cannot even recognize the person’s gender, let alone their exact identity, if they are of darker complexion.

Granting DHS access to biometric data about hundreds of millions of people, and allowing local law enforcement to use unproven facial recognition technology in criminal investigations, should strike fear into anyone who ever leaves their house. This sort of biometric intrusion goes far beyond the legitimate purview of our government. Our faces are our own.

Brenda Arthur received an unexpected visit on March 8 that, one week later, leaves her feeling more than a little uneasy.

At her door that day was an officer with the West Virginia State Police. He wanted to know about her involvement in a Freedom of Information request regarding a local mosque.

Arthur, who will turn 67 this summer, is leader of the West Virginia chapter of ACT For America, whose mission is to educate Americans about the advancement of Islamic principles in Western societies.

As a Jewish American, she was concerned about a major expansion of the Islamic Association of West Virginia in her hometown of South Charleston. This mosque has hosted an openly anti-Semitic preacher in the past, and so she went to city hall in late January to have a look at its construction permits and site plans, something that is within the right of every American citizen under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act and state open-records laws.

She had no idea that this perfectly legal activity, performed every day by citizen watchdogs across the U.S., would prompt a visit from the state police.

THIS VIDEO CENSORED BY YOUTUBE… AGAIN

(Natural News) Marketed as flu medicine, Tamiflu is actually a risky nervous system damaging, hallucinogenic drug that causes some children to go into seizures, wild delusions, and twitching fits.

The typical medical doctor, aligned with the state’s medical directives, resorts to prescribing Tamiflu as a primary treatment for people who have flu and flu-like symptoms.

This FDA approved drug, however, carries serious side effects that the government, the doctors, and the advertisements aren’t being transparent about.

The FDA has on file over 550 cases of confirmed hallucinations from Tamiflu in the U.S. since 2009. Each case has traumatized and altered the lives of individual families that can only stand by and watch helplessly as their child hallucinates and loses control of their mind and motor control.

A family from North Texas is speaking out about odd reactions that their two-year-old son endured as soon as he began taking Tamiflu. The twitching and hallucinations only stopped when they quit using the drug. Andrea and Josh Wallen said their son changed almost immediately after ingesting Tamiflu. Twitching through the night, the two-year-old banged his head repeatedly, picked at his arms, and acted out violently toward his parents.

Other families across the Nation have spoken out. A family from Indiana said their daughter began hearing voices and picking at “bugs” on her body. Another family said their six-year-old daughter tried to jump out of a window.

So why doesn’t the U.S. FDA recall this dangerous drug and go public with its hallucinogenic side effects? In 2007, Japan banned Tamiflu for children ages 10 to 19 after several dozen instances of neuropsychiatric events were reported.

What if the Food and Drug Administration, the Centers for Disease Control and health authorities came out and supported evidence-based naturopathic anti-viral treatments that don’t cause devastating side effects?

In effect, this finding documents evidence that flu vaccines spread the flu, and that so-called “herd immunity” is a medical hoax because “the herd” is actually transformed into carriers and spreaders of influenza.

Details of this bombshell study have been revealed by Sayer Ji at Green Med Info, a site that’s rapidly becoming one of the world’s most authoritative sources on intelligent analysis of real science. Green Med Info has published 500 studies that document the adverse effects (and injury) of vaccines. Find that extensive list at this link.

The study, which examined 355 volunteers who were sick with flu-like symptoms, found that people who previously received flu shots emitted sharply higher quantities of flu virus particles that can infect other people. From the study:

Fine-aerosol viral RNA was also positively associated with having influenza vaccination for both the current and prior season… We provide overwhelming evidence that humans generate infectious aerosols and quantitative data to improve mathematical models of transmission and public health interventions… Our observation of an association between repeated vaccination and increased viral aerosol generation demonstrated the power of our method, but needs confirmation.

Shockingly, people who received prior flu shot vaccinations were found to emit 6.3 times (or 630%) the number of flu virus particles emitted by non-vaccinated individuals.

This means — prepare yourself for this realization — that the most responsible way to avoid infecting other people is to AVOID being vaccinated with flu shots.

If you haven’t had dengue infection, don’t use our vaccine, drug company warns

The manufacturer of the sole dengue vaccine on the market says a new study shows that it should only be used in people who have had a previous infection from the mosquito-borne virus.

As Reuters and several other news outlets have reported, France’s Sanofi Pasteur released a statement that said a 6-year analysis of people who received the vaccine found more severe disease occurred in people who initially were naïve to the virus. Sanofi Pasteur stressed that the vaccine still protected against dengue fever when it was given to people who had prior dengue infections.

The company did not spell out the mechanism underlying the responses to the vaccine. But several researchers have warned that the vaccine could trigger antibodies in a naïve subject that enhance the ability of a second infection to cause severe disease, including a deadly hemorrhagic fever.

Aluminum is present in many vaccines

The authors of the study are associated with The Birchall Centre, Lennard-Jones Laboratories, Keele University, Staffordshire, UK; Life Sciences, Keele University; and the Department of Clinical Neuropathology, Kings College Hospital, London, UK.

From what I can see, the full text of the study has not been published yet. I’m interested to know exactly how the study authors obtained brain tissue samples from patients.

The findings? Shockingly high levels of aluminum were found in these brain samples. It’s widely acknowledged that aluminum can enter the brain and disrupt its functions.